German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
ChineseMetro Expo Line: The Telenovela
[tags]expo line, metro, los angeles, light rail[/tags]
Note: This post in no way reflects the views of all contributors, and certainly not the entire MetroRiderLA community. Aim all flames at me personally.
I have a great amount of respect for all of the other transit ideas and advocacy that Damien has. But I’m sorry to say - this Farmdale Avenue “issue” couldn’t be presented in a worse fashion or at a worse time.
Having said that, this isn’t even an issue. But let’s talk procedurally first and then substantively.
Procedurally, this is not the time for this debate. As “rail advocates” I think there’s a lot of frustration with the time-consuming EIR and approval process for rail construction. I share people’s frustration - it’s time-consuming, perhaps too time-consuming. Every time I go to Santa Monica I’m certainly tempted to return to the intersection of Wilshire and Western with a bullhorn and a shovel.
But the EIR process serves a very clear purpose - it gives all community stakeholders, even the pinheads like Eric Mann, an opportunity to voice their views, make them known to Metro, and more realistically, gives time to put pressure on elected representatives. A lot of time. Years. And all concerns about the project need to be brought up during that period.
The Metro Blue Line began running, as I recall, in 1989. In 1989 I was in 4th grade and had a crush on the girl with pigtails. We have had 18 years since the opening of the Metro Blue Line to come to some alleged “concern” about the “dangers” of LRT. The Metro Blue Line has been around for the entirety of the Expo planning process. There was a clear opportunity for any concerned citizen to bring these concerns onto the record and in front of the Expo committees. USC certainly took advantage of that opportunity with regards to their campus.
But now, all we’re going to do is delay the opening of Phase 1 and jeopardize Phase 2. I’m sorry, Phase 1 is nice and all, but it’s Phase 2 that’s going to make Expo more than just a big shiny bus. If Metro and the City and County find that Phase 1 continues to be mired in controversy, they may move on from Phase 2 to other projects, such as the Gold Line to Ontario. Now there’s a train for white people if I’ve ever heard of one.
Substantively, this is a non-issue. I don’t mean to belabor the point, but rail transit is perfectly safe. I’d venture to say that a pedestrian is no more likely to be hit by a car than by a train - probably the car is more dangerous - likely due to the lower frequency of the train and the extra caution a person takes around the train. Anecdotally, I’ve nearly been hit by cars more than a couple times, but I’ve certainly never been nearly hit by a train! But getting hit by a train sure makes the news, so we go nuts over it.
I posted the picture above for this reason. Boston has a network of streetcars, and 3 of the 4 lines street run for the vast majority of their route; 2 of those 3 run right through the hearts of major universities, Boston University on the B and Northeastern University on the E, as well as countless primary and secondary schools, both with Boston Public Schools and private. Students don’t get hit on such a basis to make the news (again, anecdotal, but if someone can prove me wrong with numbers I’m anxious to hear it - I’m not going to attempt to prove a negative, i.e. that rail transit is not dangerous to HS students).
Finally, as an advocate, which Damien says he is - we’re shooting ourselves in the foot here. From the Daily Trojan article on the subject:
Despite the protests, the community surrounding USC has neither the political clout nor the education to access and effectively protest these plans said Michael Ureña, president of the North Area Neighborhood Development Committee.
“If I put my money on the line, it’s going to be built the way it’ll be built because it’s in a black neighborhood, a Latino neighborhood, and we don’t have good political momentum or political leaders,” he said.
While we’re at it, let’s interview Eric Mann on the subject! I’m frankly shocked that he hasn’t yet reared his ugly, overgrown head in this debate. First, it’s environmental racism to not put the train through minority neighborhoods - afterall, transit is only for white people (shall I take pictures on my commute home from work, or have we dispelled this silly myth already?). But oh the horror, now it’s going to go through the minority neighborhood - and there’s an off chance it may hit someone! Racism! Oh, the horror!
Please excuse my hyperbole. But all this debate does is (1) Waste Metro’s time and (2) Make it more likely that Metro is going to throw their hands up in the air in terms of Expo Phase 2 and move onto other projects. If Expo becomes the same sort of fiasco that Hollywood Boulevard was, we may be set back decades in terms of LRT and subway development in LA.
Is that what “rail advocates” want? If so, count me out of “rail advocacy.”
[Edited to Add: Damien Newman has the great numbers that I didn't take the time to find, and has posted them over at his Street Heat blog: Follow the link here]
Discussion
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Please keep discussions civil: exercise Troll Controll.
I agree 100% Aaron. It’s too late for this. And the cries of racism are absolutely ludicrous. Now they are building trains in minority neighborhoods in order to kill minority kids? Please. First, let’s show teenagers a little respect, they are not little babies, and half of them are legally allowed to drive vehicles on their own. Second, I really don’t think this is about the kids or safety at all, but “rail advocacy” run amok. I believe there is a sentiment that the Expo Line should have been built grade separated as to make up for the “problems” our other light rail line s face (namely speed issues), and while this may be true, it should have been debated during the EIR stage as you noted. I believe what we have now is a BRU-like stunt to get people behind emotional (our children!) and racial (”environmental injustice”) issues to try and promote an ulterior motive (dream maps). It’s no secret that Damien wants only subways for rail lines projected to have over 50,000 daily boardings (read it on getlamoving.com). I completely disagree with FixExpo.
The Metro Blue Line began running in 1990. July 14, 1990 to be exact. The test runs along the high speed corridor began in February 1990.
This is getting absolutely pathetic. Yes, grade seperation is the best way to go, but don’t call it out on the mounds of “environmental racism”. I too respected Damien Goodman, but this is getting beyond ludicrious. I have a strong feeling once Expo Line opens more rail transit will be demanded in the Westside. But, with the cries for racism, we’ll never get there. And, it’s ONLY 30 PEOPLE who complain. Albeit, Damien is strong that’s why this is continuing. Very unfortunate.
You know, I don’t want to turn this into a “trash Damien” post, that’s completely inappropriate and unhelpful, but I’ve never personally been fond of the idea of creating a map with as many or more rail lines than London has. It’s a cute map, but let’s focus on what’s realistic in our lifetimes so that we’re credible activists, and I guess that’s how I feel about this too.
It’d be nice if Expo was grade separated, but it’s worlds nicer to see Expo get built at all, and sadly the pavement in LA is not, in fact, made of gold. Now if they don’t grade separate Wilshire/Western to Santa Monica, I’ll be out there hollering with the rest of them - but I’d hope I’d be hollering before construction starts!
The MTA thinks in terms of 25 years in its Long Range Transportation Plan.
I think it is useful to have a “dream plan”. Particular, London is applicable to here because both L.A. and London are sprawls and London proves rail works in a sprawl, long distance metropolis.
Have both a dream plan and a 25-Year Plan. The MTA is working on its new Long Range Transportation Plan. If we want anything to be built, it needs to get into that plan first.
Having a 25-Year Plan to suggest to the MTA and a “Dream Plan” to inspire activists are both useful.
I don’t have a problem with the dream map at all, I think it’s great and inspirational. But I just don’t approve of manipulating people and a project that is in its construction stage because it doesn’t match the specifications of a laypersons dream map. The Metro Mole doesn’t think the thing should be built at all, should he go down there and sabotage the construction because the ridership wasn’t proven with a Rapid Line first. More importantly, should he do that under the guise of other reasons.
I’m just glad Damien never mentions that he is a member of Southern California Transit Advocates when he speaks to the media, because this nonsense of his makes me ashamed to have him as a member.
Aaron and Fred have said everything else I would have said. Thanks, guys!
The other thing is, the safety stats that are often sighted to “show” how dangerous light rail is are bogus stats. In 2002, after years of declining fatalities and specifically declining fatalities per passenger mile traveled, the federal government decided that suicides would be included in fatality stats and all of a sudden light rail looked dangerous again.
I wrote more on this on my blog here http://streetheatla.blogspot.com/2007/10/national-safety-stats-on-light-rail.html .
Thanks for the corrections, Militant Angeleno.;) Close enough, I suppose I was still in 4th grade in Feb. 1990 :).
And thanks for the stats, Damien Newman, I’m going to link to those in the main body of the post.
While racism is a serious business and a major concern of mine, in this case, the issue I’m concerned about is safety, particularly this close to this many HS students who, frankly, are not all that concerned about their own safety because they know that they are going to live forever.
Safety WAS addressed in the comments on the Expo Line — I know, I made MAJOR comments, with stat’s, on this — and MTA ignored them and just kept right on going, as they did with the safety comments on the Orange Line — which they later had to agree with fully justified.
The Blue Line is the most dangerous light rail line in the U.S., with 88 fatalities to date. Things have gotten somewhat better in more recent years — we haven’t had a ten-fatality year for quite a while — in large part due to the introduction of four-quad gates (which, by the way, I was the first person to suggest, in 1991, although my proposal went absolutely nowhere at the time and I don’t even know if the people who actually implemented it years later even knew about our early research.
Building any light rail line at grade significantly increases the danger. Putting it that close to a school, where there are a huge number of kids crossing the line, many of which will simply not be paying attention, is potentially a real killer.
Keep in mind that, if the PUC approves an at-grade crossing, and if the line is built and operated in accordance with the general and specific rules, then MTA (and the CA) has just about 100% statutory immunity if someone is killed or injured — but that immunity does not extend to the School District, which could easily be subject to an action, for example, alledging that the District knew about the risk (as evidenced by all the work that the school’s chief safety professional has put into workign with MTA) and failed to provide sufficient crossing guards. Don’t discount such actions, there is a very recent case where the School District was ordered to pay over $5 million because a parent with a disability lost control of her van and killed a young student — and it is very difficult to figure out what the District did wrong or could have done different.
The proposals to study a pedestrial bridge or tunnel are wastes of money. There is no way to block the street, and can anyone imagine some HS kid — or anyone with a transportation disability, goesing way out of their way to reach the upramp/stairs, climbing up or down over 20 feet, and then doing the same thing on the other side — when all they have to do is walk less than 50 feet across the tracks at grade level?
Another problem is the auto traffic when school is staring and ending. If you have ever been around any school in LA during one these, this alone is a huge traffic hazzard. Well, if some parent, or whatever, driving by, gets confused and gets hit by a train, there is a good chance that the car is going to wind up going into where dozens of kids are standing.
There are real safety risks here. Let’s look at them and see what is required to minimize the risk — the same way that EVERY rail/BRT grade crossing should be examined.
citing this article.
that is to say she wasn’t aware of the potential “risk” til damien created his little task force of “believe anythings.” shits unreal. if there was a danger, which there isn’t–i agree with fred when he says teenagers aren’t little babies, and would go even further to say they’re probably all more street savvy than anyone on this board, get over yourselves, they can handle not getting hit by a damn train–it should have been brought up during the EIR not when the ground has been broken and heading your way. especially annoying is this joker LaMotte (Los Angeles school board member) who all of a sudden is seeing an opportunity to advance her name and career so is jumping all over this idiotic opportunity. of all people that should have voiced concern during the EIR stage it’s her. isn’t it, to some capacity, her job? and of course, as if this even needs to be said again, the whole racist position to this is so absurd and outlandish it makes one wonder if Damien has somehow joined the BRU.
Tom: I stopped reading after the second paragraph. This is the wrong time for these complaints, and the wrong method. I think the one thing everyone can agree on is that Metro learns from mistakes.
I can assure you that Metro doesn’t ignore these comments, and that they relied on them in building new rail construction - look at how the Gold Line took them into account. But if you believe that they flouted that process (which they didn’t), you have administrative remedies that don’t involve this current media-driven temper tantrum.
Why not stop all vehicle traffic around schools? 4,800 people died in California as a result of being hit by cars in 2002! My God, we should just shut down roads entirely. Why didn’t I think of this before? I mean, really, that’s a real safety issue!
There’s absolutely risks, as with anything, but grade separation? At this stage of the game? As you noted, cars themselves present a risk to students, pedestrians, elderly, disabled, black, white, Asian… why aren’t we fighting to tunnel the road itself? An out of control van hit a student? If it was underground that wouldn’t have happened, right? What racist forces are keeping cars on surface roads?
If safety is a concern, there are easier simpler cheaper solutions than can protect people. Nothing will offer 100% protection, but that’s life. Remember, kids are in school most of the they day… it’s when they are coming to school in the morning and leaving school in the early afternoon that risk for injury is increased. During those times cars have to drive slower, how about slow the train down during those times? During those times students must also listen to human crossing guards, why not hire crossing guards to keep students from crossing the tracks at unsafe times? The most absurd thing I read in the FixExpo site is that they don’t want the train to ring its bells as it comes by. How does that promote safety?
Property values, Fred, property values! Didn’t you get that memo? Bells decrease property values, and the lower the property values, the more likely innocent children are to be murdered by cold, uncaring trains. I mean, really, the correlation is obvious!
:).
tom said:
you’ve got to be a parent to say something so extraordinarily parental and ludicrous. yes, teens/kids/whatever may not think of death as you might, as in it’s sooooooo far away they don’t have to worry, however they don’t think they can take on a train no matter how worried you might be/have been/are for you kin. there’s a better chance of you getting hit by the damn thing.
and wuts more, aaron’s entirely right, cars are the #1 killer and account for %29.3 of deaths between 15-24 so where shall we put the skyway?
however i agree that as many safety precautions as possible should be taken, duh– all the things fred mentioned seem like great ways to make sure of it– but bringing the construction to a halt because of a couple over protective parents rather than logic is absurd.
Incredible when we think about how many 15 year olds are given licenses/permits to drive. Why isn’t that a bigger issue??
I don’t know. I rarely hear about kids, just being kids, getting hit by trains. Mostly it’s *adults* trying to beat the train, or suicides….
It’s just too late. Everyone has said it, and everyone is right. It’s just too late. Like the Blue Line, Dorsey High has been where it is long before the Expo Line was planned. If a grade level crossing is in fact racist, it would have been just as racist 5 years ago. And as Fred pointed out, why not just slow down the trains that would pass by as school gets out? If the expo is run with the same frequency as the Blue line, that would mean that there would be 4 trains affected out of roughly 125 daily trains. I am generally a supporter of grade separation and I think Damien’s get LA moving plan is to be commended. But this is getting out of hand. We are just now hearing that Expo phase 1 may be cut short, if Fix Expo keeps up, it may be cut altogether. Damien should redirect his grade separating efforts to Culver City and Phase 2, where they would help, not hurt.
I think the one thing everyone can agree on is that Metro learns from mistakes.
Ummmmmm….
Anyway. Tom good to see you here injecting a little data into the mutual admiration society.
At grade light rail is dangerous. It is deliberately more dangerous than it could be and no one familiar with the issues denies this. As a comparison we don’t make auto drivers wear helmets either. Okay, now that we understand this is about acceptable safety and not absolute safety, who wants to draw the line?
Okay, let’s save even more money with at grade freeways. See?
“Okay, let’s save even more money with at grade freeways. See?”
No I don’t see. We could say the same thing about any roadway. Roadways are dangerous, why don’t we save lives by grade separating Exposition Blvd? See? We could either tunnel it or elevate it and kids would be able to cross the street without any worries. We’d have to do the same to Farmdale Ave. and Rodeo Rd. as well if safety is our goal. All roads can be grade separated, as anyone familiar with them knows, so having these roads at grade is deliberately dangerous.
“Okay, now that we understand this is about acceptable safety and not absolute safety, who wants to draw the line?”
I’ll draw the line. How about at something reasonable. Like I said earlier, kids are only a worry in the morning and early afternoon… why don’t we do the same thing we do with cars during that time, slow them down.
Anyways…I wonder how many people have died on the Harbor Freeway in the last 17 years?
lolz. and a damn proud member.
Okay, let’s save even more money with at grade freeways. See?
There already are quite a few at grade freeways, including some within the LA area…
Actually, Tom, I’ve looked at the Draft EIR record of comments for this project, and nowhere do you mention safety, but rather concentrate on effectiveness of bus vs. rail and its justification. You did not make comments in the Final EIR before it was submitted to FTA as a record of decision. None of LAUSD’s comments asked for anything more than some fencing and crossing guards and sufficient time for people to cross. So, indeed, this comments was new. The specific grade crossing issue at Dorsey SHS was first addressed by the Baldwin Neighborhood Homeowners’ Association in the FTA ROD comment period. Any comments made in the Draft EIR (I don’t have time to read every comment in the EIR right now) were not numerous or sufficient enough to merit MTA noting this in their summary.
The interesting part is that someone or anyone could assume that a person who spent thousands of hours researching and talking to the experts and political players to put together the GLAM plan, would not do the same on this Expo Line issue.
I say this in total respect, but there are those who are transit advocates because they like trains, buses, the transit lifestyle, etc., and there are those who spend the time actually digging beyond the soundbytes and surface. A couple of them have commented in this thread already, and it’s as though they didn’t speak - they were ignored or responded to with soundbytes. I don’t suspect my reply to some of the comments will be addressed any differently.
FredCamino wrote:
I have never said building the train was environmental racism. I said the disparate design in phase 1 (and don’t get me started on phase 2) is textbook environmental racism. Perhaps you should look up the definition. Perhaps you should review the record. Recent post on http://www.FixExpo.org, is just the surface.
FredCamino wrote:
Hi Fred,
If you ever want to know my motives you can always email me.
FredCamino wrote:
Sorry Fred. It’s not a want, it’s Metro’s Transit Service Policy planning warrants, which establishes 50K boardings per day as the threshold to require 100% grade separation. I asked 11 months ago how and why the policy is being violated here, and I have yet to receive an answer. Like all the difficult questions I’ve asked over the last 11 months, I’ve yet to receive an answer.
LAofAnaheim wrote:
2500 signatures collected over just 4 weekends, 14 homeowners association/community groups, a former city councilman, former LADOT general manager, school board, city of culver city, PUC staff, and plenty of transit advocates. The meeting on the 30th was a parents meeting was called and put together hastily in an attempt to inform the parents, who were to be sent notices but were not for the meeting on the 17th, where 150 individuals showed up. There was a miscommunication again and the notice for the 30th didn’t go out. It’s a challenge notifying the Dorsey parents due to operational difficulties on campus.
While I appreciate the compliment, I’m simply telling people the facts as they area. A sleeping giant has been awakened.
FredCamino wrote:
Fred you’re more than welcome to come down to South LA and talk to the people who have been dealing with this issue since the late 90s and early 2000s to find out who has been manipulating whom.
TomRubin wrote:
Tom don’t bother these guys with the inside baseball. As far as they’re concerned Metro is run by saints, and the process was fair, open and transparent.
tykejohnson wrote:
Hi Tyke, I’m just giving people the facts. If you have issue with anything I’ve said (all of which is verifiable) please point that out so it can be addressed. Thank you.
tykejohnson wrote:
Please elaborate, and reference the crossing designs when doing so. Thank you.
tykejohnson wrote:
Yes, I’m fighting for additional money for rail transit. They’re welcoming me with open arms. LMAO!
FredCamino wrote:
Grade separation of streets would require massive reconstruction of over 483 square miles in Los Angeles County alone. Massive reconfiguration of millions of cars and buses. Undergrounding over 10,000 bus stops (and that’s just Metro). Here we’re talking about 8.6 miles, less than a dozen stations, and less than two dozen intersections. You really find the two analogous?
I’ll conclude my reply with question for all: if spending 30-50% more on our cars and highway infrastructure provided damn near absolute safety, would it not be worth it?
The San Francisco Muni cars run at grade on the streets before going into subway mode at the West Portal station.
If there are specific crossings or stops that should be grade separated, that is one thing, but I don’t think everything needs to be grade separated on every line. We also cannot prevent every accident.
Even more, we cannot stop every yahoo who thinks his car can outrun a train from risking his own life because he is impatient.
We take practical safety steps, but we cannot ensure against stupidity.
If you run a railroad crossing because you’re impatient and you get hit by a train, that’s your fault, not the MTA’s.
Dan: You’re right. Many cities have this kind of streetcar configuration. I haven’t seen West Portal yet, but the Sunset Tunnel entrance/exit on the N-Judah is pretty spectacular, a sharp curve coming out of Carl and Cole and through the intersection into the tunnel. I haven’t been on the other MUNI lines yet but the Judah goes past anything worth going past, including schools, and they only grade separate the N for the Market subway and for avoiding steep grades (Buena Vista Park).
Why it’s a source of such drama here is beyond me. We have insanely dangerous street configurations for pedestrians (Hello, Hollywood HS and kids crossing Sunset Boulevard?) and we don’t give much of a care about that, but when it’s a train “oh, the horror!” Well, you can get killed just as easily by the Prius as you can be by the train.
Well, you can get killed just as easily by the Prius as you can be by the train.
The argument could easily be made that you could be killed by a Prius more easily than the train. The train travels on a fixed route, and has warning signals that it is coming (crossing gates, horns, lights, etc), whereas the vehicle travels on road but not a fixed path, doesn’t have crossing gates, or other warning systems… With the most basic of precautions, it is much safer to cross railroad tracks than it is to cross a street.
That’s pretty clear.
1) People fear what they don’t know (or are more easily scared into fearing what they haven’t personally experienced themselves.
2) The people who lost the argument about the rail line being constructed will grab at any straw they think will kill the project.
3) It’s human nature for many people to want to get caught up in the drama about anything, “Won’t someone please think of the children….”
Not everyone who wants grade separation is anti-rail, of course, as many people who support rail are firm believers in grade separation, but those who are anti-rail will hitch onto this issue and ride it for all its worth in an attempt to sabotage the project.
Having lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, New York and London, I have seen all these modalities and I do not fear them.
The one advantage now that L.A. didn’t have 20 years ago was that there is heavy rail (Red/Purple), light rail (Blue/Green/Gold) and busway (Orange) and a rapid bus system. People can compare these modalities for themselves live and decide which ones they like.
“Grade separation of streets would require massive reconstruction of over 483 square miles in Los Angeles County alone. Massive reconfiguration of millions of cars and buses. Undergrounding over 10,000 bus stops (and that’s just Metro). Here we’re talking about 8.6 miles, less than a dozen stations, and less than two dozen intersections. You really find the two analogous?”
But if safety is your cause, our at grade auto infrastructure kills far more people every year than have been killed in the past 17 on the Blue Line. It’s a big project, but if you get people behind the facts, maybe you can push it through. Cost be damned, there are lives at stake. But of course, in the end I wasn’t seriously recommend we grade-separate roadways, it was an a purposefully absurd suggestion in order to make a point.
“if spending 30-50% more on our cars and highway infrastructure provided damn near absolute safety, would it not be worth it?”
No, because absolute safety doesn’t exist and because money doesn’t grow on trees. Your idea is to switch a $640 million dollar at-grade light-rail line to a $640 million dollar subway line. The line is already experiencing cost overruns that is threating its future and the future of further rail projects in the region. Bottom line is that there are less expensive ways to increase safety, but you are opposed to them because they don’t fit your vision.
Now I don’t think any of us here are against grade-separation. In fact, I’m sure most of us prefer it. Clearly it is safer and clearly it is faster, but what’s also clear is that from the early stages the Expo Line was not going to be a subway. There’s nothing in the Draft EIR that implies a subway (with the exception of the proposal of a short subway near USC), and like Calwatch said, the comments do the Draft EIR (both written and spoken) do not reflect the mission of FixExpo.
“Sorry Fred. It’s not a want, it’s Metro’s Transit Service Policy planning warrants, which establishes 50K boardings per day as the threshold to require 100% grade separation.”
Where do you find this? I read Metro’s “Grade Crossings for LRT” document… it’s a detailed 44 page guide with charts, graphs, and equations that are all used in a three milestone process to decide whether or not a crossing should be grade separated or not. Nowhere in the document is 50,000 or 50k to be found.
“2500 signatures collected over just 4 weekends, 14 homeowners association/community groups, a former city councilman, former LADOT general manager, school board, city of culver city, PUC staff, and plenty of transit advocates. The meeting on the 30th was a parents meeting was called and put together hastily in an attempt to inform the parents, who were to be sent notices but were not for the meeting on the 17th, where 150 individuals showed up.”
The bigger question is why was FixExpo.org registered in July of this year? Why was ExpoCommunities.com establish in January of this year? Why are these scrambled meetings taking place now? The Draft EIR was distributed in 2001, and the Final EIR in October of 2005. Why wait more than a year (or 5 years since the Draft EIR) to take action?
“If you ever want to know my motives you can always email me.”
Your motives are clearly stated in your petition:
You want a subway. There is no other option. Clearly stated motive.
I may be a half-assed transit advocate, but I stand by the rest of the “mutual admiration society” in my opposition to converting the Expo Line into a subway at the stage of the game. Six years ago? Sure, signed me up.
I beileve that the Expo line be built all the way to Santa Monica as soon as possible. I also think that such lines should be built to almost every place in L.A. & Orange counties so that people like me will be able to go those places who’ve had trouble with the law because we’re forced to drive due to lack of such transit services only wind up with a ticket and an insulting lecture for something that used to be not a infraction until about 20 years ago. I was forced into retirement last year as a bass player due “thanks” to this state’s seatbelt law and the “Presidunce’s” “Click or Ticket” campaighn(in the ass) because I was stopped by a CHP criuser for not putting on my goddanmed seatbelt. Because I’ve hated the whole idea of what I refer to as vehiclar safety constraints I’ve decided that what I like refer to as the “road warrior” culture isn’t worth it to me to deal with. The false accusations of “environmental racism” that I see in some these letters I fear might prove to hurt the urban rail cause as much as the Republican “road warrior” NIMBY homeowner groups have done in many parts of country including here in the O.C..